USYD Commerce cut-off now higher than UNSW's (1 Viewer)

[sarevok]

I thought it would be good to point this out given that in the past on this forum UNSW Commerce students have attempted to argue that their degree is superior because its UAI cut-off is higher.
I guess this is just more evidence that USYD and UNSW's respective Commerce degrees are extremely close in quality, and the argument about which is superior is pointless.

 

[Minai]

I don't think anyone has argued that one degree is better than another simply because the UAI cutoff is higher - I think everyone knows its supply/demand based to a certain extent.

But the fact that you've raised this fact in a thread shows a lingering inferiority complex!

 

[§eraphim]

This yr's cutoffs are unusual. The UNSW Commerce Faculty has opened up more places for new students and transfers because it is currently in a operating deficit (like many other faculties in many other unis). This can be attributed to the fall in the real amt of Cwth funding and has led to a general decline in UAI cutoffs across the board.

USyd artifically maintains the cutoffs within a certain range so you can't really compare.

The original argument should have been that UNSW's higher UAI cutoff attracts brighter students and as a consequence helps create a more vibrant and challenging environment to learn in.

 

[sarevok]

I don't think anyone has argued that one degree is better than another simply because the UAI cutoff is higher - I think everyone knows its supply/demand based to a certain extent.

But the fact that you've raised this fact in a thread shows a lingering inferiority complex!

Lol, take a browse back through the USYD v UNSW commerce threads mate. Seraphim is a culprit in particular.
Anyway, I just think this does highlight the closeness between the two degrees.

 

[§eraphim]

haha at least i speak with substance.

That's very very simplistic. I'll reiterate what Minai said; cutoff says nothing about the quality of the 2 degrees. It just reflects supply and demand, pure and simple. And supply is determined by the prevailing economics conditions (like the fall in Gov funding) and demand is determined by ppl's expectations (which are shaped by uni marketing and friend's opinions, etc). Graduate outcomes are a much better measure.

I think the artificial convergence of the UAI cutoffs speaks more about the Business Faculty's mastery of the supply curve. --> economics in action.

 

[sarevok]

I'll reiterate what Minai said; cutoff says nothing about the quality of the 2 degrees.

Didn't you just say that higher cut-offs "attract(s) brighter students and as a consequence help(s) create a more vibrant and challenging environment to learn in"? Surely this would impact on the quality of the degree? I would also argue that higher cut-offs may mean that the faculty is more in demand with students who at least perceive it as being of better quality.

anyway - i'm not trying to make the argument that higher uai cut-offs are a substantial measurement of a degree's quality. i'm merely saying that such an argument has been raised on here in the past by unsw students, and now it is redundant. i really couldn't care less whether unsw or usyd has the better degree, because imo any difference is extremely marginal

 

[§eraphim]

1. yes, it does (for those students who entered when the UAI cutoff's were significantly different)
2. perceptions can be shaped easily by advertising, friend's half-baked opinion, etc

the fact that uai cutoffs have converged speaks nothing about the degree itself. plus, unsw has co-op students and cadets!

 

[Frigid]

I thought it would be good to point this out given that in the past on this forum UNSW Commerce students have attempted to argue that their degree is superior because its UAI cut-off is higher.
I guess this is just more evidence that USYD and UNSW's respective Commerce degrees are extremely close in quality, and the argument about which is superior is pointless.

wtf?

your first sentence seems to imply that you don't think the UAI cutoff is an indicator of quality.

yet your second sentence implies that the UAI increase seems to imply it is.

Surely this would impact on the quality of the degree? I would also argue that higher cut-offs may mean that the faculty is more in demand with students who at least perceive it as being of better quality.

i suppose commerce has a shitload of internationals, full-fee and transfer students.

 

[mr_shittles]

No that USyd Commerce has a higher cut off, Asians will start going there! Then it will look the same as UNSW Commerce.

 

[sarevok]

your first sentence seems to imply that you don't think the UAI cutoff is an indicator of quality.

yet your second sentence implies that the UAI increase seems to imply it is.

no, that's not at all what i meant. i do think the uai cut-off can be a measure of quality, though not always a substantial one. my point was simply that unsw students have said in the past that their commerce degree is superior because the cut-off is higher than usyd's, and now the cut-off is lower, indicating that that argument is moot. i never said anywhere that i don't think the uai cut-off can't be a measure of quality, nor do i think i implied it.

 

[kow_dude]

I agree with sarevok that there has been some UNSW BOSers arguing that their commerce degree is more 'superior' that USyd's because of the higher cut-off in previous years. But now that you are migrating to UNSW, i'm guessing you would now argue that UNSW commerce is better than USyd's

No that USyd Commerce has a higher cut off, Asians will start going there! Then it will look the same as UNSW Commerce.

Omg please no!! No offence to any internationals here, but i think it's already horrible and depressing enough to be surrounded by asians constantly speaking in a foreign language.

 

[Capitalist]

No that USyd Commerce has a higher cut off, Asians will start going there! Then it will look the same as UNSW Commerce.

Hahaha. I thought there were quite alot of asians in USYD BCom already anyway.

 

[seremify007]

I don't think anyone has argued that one degree is better than another simply because the UAI cutoff is higher - I think everyone knows its supply/demand based to a certain extent.

That's what I was thinking. I've always heard the quality of the degree and lecturers was higher at UNSW, and based on what I saw at the Open Day lectures at USYD and UNSW for Accounting, I'm inclined to agree with that too based on the facilities and the presenters. Nonetheless, I shouldn't base my entire opinion on just one or two lectures but I'm pretty sure both degrees are very good- I have peers (and family) who attended one or the other and have ended up working in the same companies/firms.

As for why UNSW's B Comm went down, I think demand in general has fallen (across all of UNSW's undergraduate courses), and there are more spots open because of increased capacity, not to mention the opening of UNSW Singapore which will take away some of the fobspots.. I mean International Fee Paying Students^^

Regardless, I'm still picking B Comm (PT) =]

 

[Omnidragon]

There are two theories we can get out from UAI cut-offs:

1. Cut-offs are just demand-suply, DUH!! But... there's a reason why the demand-supply ratio is higher. It's because it's better (this is known as the Omni Theory).

2. Even if demand is not an indication of which is better (because one uni may be so poor that it has only one undergrad position, hence a very high demand-supply ratio) , there are enough people out there who will use the cut-off mark to evaluate whether a degree is better.

The fact that we're even having this discussion is evidence that there are going to be people who evaluate a degree based on cut-offs (This is called the Dragon Theory).

 

[Lainee]

There are two theories we can get out from UAI cut-offs:

1. Cut-offs are just demand-suply, DUH!! But... there's a reason why the demand-supply ratio is higher. It's because it's better (this is known as the Omni Theory).

2. Even if demand is not an indication of which is better (because one uni may be so poor that it has only one undergrad position, hence a very high demand-supply ratio) , there are enough people out there who will use the cut-off mark to evaluate whether a degree is better.

The fact that we're even having this discussion is evidence that there are going to be people who evaluate a degree based on cut-offs (This is called the Dragon Theory).

:rofl: They don't become theories until they've been tested and proved true. I'm formally renaming them, henceforth, as the Omni and Dragon hypotheses.

A UAI can be treated as a real financial asset, as investing it into a particular degree at a particular university and obtaining a stated degree X, can allow you to create a regular cashflow stream (income) in future years.

Hence, from a purely economic standpoint, the intuitive decision is to 'invest' your UAI into the course of study that will guarantee the highest return in the least number of years. Thus, the UAI can be considered a number value of how much future earning potential you can gain (not taking into account any future 'investment' into your earning potential, e.g. maininting a HD average in uni). Taking another step further in this exercise in logic, cutoffs which represent the lowest UAI accepted into the course, also represent the lowest possible earning potential a person can gain from enrolling in said course.

Therefore, by enrolling in a course that has the highest UAI cutoff you can enter into will ensure that your future earning potential will be the personal highest that you can obtain from your UAI.

:rofl:

 

[seremify007]

I read the funniest thing on some random person's blog..

A GUIDE to decide whether to do a BACHELOR OF COMMERCE at UNSW OR USYD

1.
Were you offered a scholarship to UNSW? If yes, go to UNSW
Were you offered a scholarship to USYD? If yes, go to USYD
Were you offered a scholarship to both? If yes, go to 2.
Were you offered a scholarship to neither? If yes, have a hug and go to 2.
Are you going to be paying full fee? If yes, forget about either and go to ANU, MAQ or UWS.

2.
Do you want to do an accounting major? If yes, go to UNSW. If No, go to 3.

3.
Do you like the idea of travelling for an extra 20 minutes each day? If no, go to USYD, if you live in the Eastern suburbs go to UNSW. If you don't care go to 4.

4.
Are you asian? Will you fit in with the "asian social scene"? If yes go to UNSW, if you want a decent social scene, go to USYD.

Other questions to ask yourself:
- Does sandstone tickle your pickle?
- Do you want to work with a group of aspiring UN officials and diplomats or aspiring investment bankers?
- Do you like pretty buildings? The new law faculty at UNSW will be open before the new faculty at Usyd

 

[Minai]

I think mr_shittles raised an interesting point for all the "USyd is good, has less asians" etc. Now that the USyd cutoff is higher, asian parents will percieve USyd to be the best and hence more internationals and asians will go to USyd

 

[mr_shittles]

Hahaha. I thought there were quite alot of asians in USYD BCom already anyway.

Wel now there's going to be more . . . heaps more.

 

[seremify007]

It takes a long time for entrenched perceptions to change.

Indeed. Alot of my family studied in UNSW (ie. parents generation) so they are very supportive of UNSW's education, but it shouldn't be too long before the "My UAI is bigger than your UAI" becomes the motivation to go to USYD for B Comm, leaving UNSW less FOB-riffic, but I'm still inclined to think that some of the would-be FOBs of UNSW, are studying in UNSW Asia.

 

[Omnidragon]

:rofl: They don't become theories until they've been tested and proved true. I'm formally renaming them, henceforth, as the Omni and Dragon hypotheses.

A UAI can be treated as a real financial asset, as investing it into a particular degree at a particular university and obtaining a stated degree X, can allow you to create a regular cashflow stream (income) in future years.

Hence, from a purely economic standpoint, the intuitive decision is to 'invest' your UAI into the course of study that will guarantee the highest return in the least number of years. Thus, the UAI can be considered a number value of how much future earning potential you can gain (not taking into account any future 'investment' into your earning potential, e.g. maininting a HD average in uni). Taking another step further in this exercise in logic, cutoffs which represent the lowest UAI accepted into the course, also represent the lowest possible earning potential a person can gain from enrolling in said course.

Therefore, by enrolling in a course that has the highest UAI cutoff you can enter into will ensure that your future earning potential will be the personal highest that you can obtain from your UAI.

:rofl:

We'll call that the Lainee Hypothesis.